September 2011 General Election

Blue Wolf II:
I think I already pointed out that's not an official list of eligible candidates, that's merely a list of RA members.

However, since you want to play that game, I nominate myself for Delegate. Let's see how far we can take this, eh?
Click to expand...
you are ineligible so don't start trolling this thread Wolf.
 
Am I? It would be nice if I had something that told me that such as, say, a list.

Is it so hard to actually do your job? Perhaps you shouldn't have accepted the position then.
 
It's not to difficult or takes much brain power to figure out who is eligible.

The seniority and membership list that is posted in the R.A. has the date of the most recent admission of the current R.A. membership; the list is required in order to determine which R.A. member has the greatest seniority (and who does not hold an office and can therefore act as Speaker Pro Tempore).

Since one must be a member of the RA for 30 days prior to the beginning of the election cycle (again, something easy to compute), it is easy to look at the date a RA member was most recently admitted and see if that date is prior to the date that is 30 days prior to the beginning of the election cycle. In sum, if the RA member (whether or not they currently hold an office) was in the RA on August 1, 2011, then they're eligible. And obviously if someone was removed from the RA during the month of August they can't meet the 30 day requirement.

BW, with that nugget of information, you could figure it out yourself.
 
Blue Wolf II:
And yet I am not the one whose word determines eligibility...

This is a very simple task, I don't think I am asking for very much.
Click to expand...
In sum, if the RA member (whether or not they currently hold an office) was in the RA on August 1, 2011, then they're eligible. And obviously if someone was removed from the RA during the month of August they can't meet the 30 day requirement.

BW, with that nugget of information, you could figure it out yourself.
Click to expand...

No, you're just being lazy BW. You got your answer, now please move on.
 
Blue Wolf, please stop complaining unnecessarily. You have your answer, and please stop being lazy.

Nominations have concluded.

The following candidates are as follows:

Delegate:
Grosseschnauzer (self-nominated, seconded by FALCONKATS)
Felasia (self-nominated, seconded by Topid)

Vice Delegate:
Pasargrad (self-nominated, seconded by FALCONKATS)

Regional Assembly Speaker:
A Mean Old Man (self-nominated, seconded by Blue Wolf II)

Voting will be shortly.
 
The Voting Booth:
Blue Wolf, please stop complaining unnecessarily. You have your answer, and please stop being lazy.
Click to expand...

No, I don't and there is still no *official* list. If anyone was being lazy here, it was you.

Again, the point here is not that I can do it myself, I can and already have. The point is I am not the election official so my word doesn't count for jack officially, only informally. It doesn't really matter now that nominations are over, but the fact that I had to put up with this amount of resistance to get an officially approved list, which was still never produced, is just outright silly.
 
While BW2 is deliberately being annoying in the way that he complains about certain issues, if someone has been assigned the duty of making an official list of eligible candidates for the general elections, I can't see why they wouldn't be expected to carry out said duty. We can do the math ourselves, and I believe most of us have, but we shouldn't have to if the policy is that someone else is required to do it for us. If that policy is going to be ignored it should be removed. If that policy doesn't actually exist and I'm being misled then I don't know why BW2 is being so loud.
:P
 
Sometimes being persistent is confused with being annoying.

Let's be clear about what is happening in this election. We have an ADMISSION from the sitting RA Speaker - currently a candidate for Delegate - that there are both voters and candidates on the current list that are not legally entitled to be there.

One (and only one) of these delegates, Eluvatar, recognized the problem, took the high road and resigned, and is going through the process of reapplying - despite the fact that his has lost his right to vote and/or be a candidate in this election. On this matter Eluvatar, and him alone, ought to be applauded.

What about the rights of the other RA delegates that were removed in the days leading up to the election? Let alone the whole JAL mess, which is also grounded in an RA eligibility issue.

Whether it was done purposefully, or inadvertently, this is a SERIOUS breach of the electoral process. With the small size of the Regional Assembly as it is currently constituted, even a small impropriety could have serious consequences. The results of this election have been compromised before it has even taken place.

So BW2, and every other thinking member of the RA ought to be persistent about getting answers on this issue.
 
What about the rights of the other RA delegates that were removed in the days leading up to the election? Let alone the whole JAL mess, which is also grounded in an RA eligibility issue.
Click to expand...
JAL is not a mess he was a delegate who went rouge .courts should have dealt and banned him from being eligible for RA membership long time back.
 
Pasargad:
What about the rights of the other RA delegates that were removed in the days leading up to the election? Let alone the whole JAL mess, which is also grounded in an RA eligibility issue.
Click to expand...
JAL is not a mess he was a delegate who went rouge .courts should have dealt and banned him from being eligible for RA membership long time back.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm finding the current fiasco in the Court to be really baffling. He should have been ousted ages ago, and the evidence against him is overwhelming. The problems in the Court seem to be derived from the fact that neither the prosecution nor the defense have been following Court procedures, unless the Justice who made that statement is totally lost.
 
TNP has a long history of never bringing charges against rogue delegates and even pardoning them. As far as I am aware, JAL is the only rogue delegate to ever have charges pressed against them by this government, and we've had Pixiedance (Ivan specifically), UPS Rail, and Great Bight. The lateness of the charges, the history behind it, and the correlation with elections leads me to believe this is nothing more than a distracting show trial.

Its detracting from a real issue we are having here, at the very least we have some sort of possibly illegal actions on behalf of the Speaker, and at the most we might have what could be construed as election fraud.
 
As I have stated on the freedom of informortion request thread, I have conducted my duty as Speaker to the best of my ability during the time when no one seems to want the post. Clearly it's a thankless job and I find it insulting to be accused of attempting an election fraud, especially when the two person I was accused of cohorting with are closer to the other candidates then me.
 
A mean old man:
EDIT: w/e.
I don't understand the general lack of communication around here.
Click to expand...
It's quite simple. Create as many hoops as possible so that only people used to this get to vote. Security by obscurity!

(This post not intended to be a factual statement).
 
Felasia:
As I have stated on the freedom of informortion request thread, I have conducted my duty as Speaker to the best of my ability during the time when no one seems to want the post. Clearly it's a thankless job and I find it insulting to be accused of attempting an election fraud, especially when the two person I was accused of cohorting with are closer to the other candidates then me.
Click to expand...
Again, let me state clearly that I do NOT accuse you of attempting an election fraud. I take you at your word that it was an oversight.

But motivation aside, an acclaimed candidate who should not legally be running or voting is a pretty big problem. Nothing personal.
 
Pasargad:
What about the rights of the other RA delegates that were removed in the days leading up to the election? Let alone the whole JAL mess, which is also grounded in an RA eligibility issue.
Click to expand...
JAL is not a mess he was a delegate who went rouge .courts should have dealt and banned him from being eligible for RA membership long time back.
Click to expand...
I am a newbie, so I don't have the historical background on the JAL case, other than what I have read. If there is sufficient evidence to prosecute under TNP law, then go ahead (as I have said many times before). I am not a supporter of criminality, I am a supporter of open and transparent due process of law, applied equally to all.

But the timing, and the way the whole thing has been handled is a little messy. YOU are correct, the courts should have acted long ago, if they felt strongly about it.

As with the voting/candidate list confusion, I don't believe (or at least I don't have any evidence) that there was any intentional wrong-doing by any officer of TNP.

But Law 101 is that justice must be seen to be done in order to be done. The perception that individuals are receiving special treatment, or conversely, are being targeted for special prosecution is a serious problem, whether this is happening in fact or not.

I know a lot of you guys have known each other for years (for good or for ill), but if there is a sincere desire to get new blood engaged in the region, care must be taken to avoid the perception of an Old Boys Club, where the law takes second place to the personalities involved. That has always been the knock on feeder regions, right? So, perception matters.

As an aside, Pars., I think you did the right thing withdrawing your candidacy for now. I sincerely hope that a resolution is reached whereby you can offer up your candidacy, legally and legitimately, without delay. Taking the high road certainly improves your chances of getting my vote, anyways.
 
Some of the problem, or maybe much of it seems to be the change that required posting by RA members within a 15 day period as opposed to the activity (logging in) within a 30 day period; a standard that had been in place for a long time.

The outgoing Speaker immediately implemented the change and in my mind was too rigid in how he did it. I did not support this change (in fact I stated that I opposed it but supported a second change made at the same time, and abstained on the final vote.

I opposed the attempt to change the activity activity for officeholders that also sought to reduce the 30 day period to 15 days, partially based on how the RA change had been implemented, and I was joined by enough RA members in opposing that change that the constitutional amendment was defeated.

I've already introduced a bill to restore the prior activity period language for RA members; I think all of this would have been avoided had we ledt the 30 day rule alone. I'm even more emphatic in that belief now than I was when it was adopted over my opposition.

As to the list issue, the rules are clear that RA membership is basically locked down during votes on legislation and during election periods. As a general practice, Speakers have chosen to exercise their constitutional discretion on RA procedure and not remove RA members during election periods because it would create the type of confusion we're seeing this time.

IF we need another RA rule specifically laying out those periods where RA removals are held in abeyance (during legislative votes and elections), then we'll have to do it. But this is a problem that could have been avoided had the change not been adopted in the first place, and as far as I am concerned, it is a demonstration of the need to think through the problems that can be created when changes are not thought through completely.
 
Greater Petersan, at this point, we may have to complete the regular general election and resolve the VD position by interim appointment to fill a vacancy and a subsequent special election, as was the case when Blackshear, as Vice Delegate became Delegate, and I was appointed, and then elected to fill the vacancy for Vice Delegate during that term. If I am elected Delegate, I will promptly take the required steps to address the V.D. vacancy.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Greater Petersan, at this point, we may have to complete the regular general election and resolve the VD position by interim appointment to fill a vacancy and a subsequent special election, as was the case when Blackshear, as Vice Delegate became Delegate, and I was appointed, and then elected to fill the vacancy for Vice Delegate during that term. If I am elected Delegate, I will promptly take the required steps to address the V.D. vacancy.
Click to expand...
Surely there must be some means to "unlock" the list when it can be shown that the list itself has been compromised. If not, it should be added to the duties of the Electoral Officer.

For the record, if that is the ultimate course of action, I would recommend and support appointing Parsagard to that position (for whatever that is worth to you) - my issue was never with him personally, and his decision to step back from the race demonstrated good judgement and character. His candidacy is a victim here also.
 
A mean old man:
While BW2 is deliberately being annoying in the way that he complains about certain issues, if someone has been assigned the duty of making an official list of eligible candidates for the general elections, I can't see why they wouldn't be expected to carry out said duty. We can do the math ourselves, and I believe most of us have, but we shouldn't have to if the policy is that someone else is required to do it for us. If that policy is going to be ignored it should be removed. If that policy doesn't actually exist and I'm being misled then I don't know why BW2 is being so loud.
:P
Click to expand...
And that's the thing. BW is essentially trolloing because he is lazy. Felasia and Grosse have explained how easy it is for him to find out, and he refused, because he was lazy and he wanted to give me a hard time. Why he still has bias towards me after these years I don't know, but he needs to get over it. THe only times I was EC someone came up to start controversy probably due to personal bias towards me. It's a game, it's been years, get over it people and grow up.

Raiders need to stop being lazy trolls. There is no election fraud here. BW was being lazy and wanted to troll.
 
Govindia:
Raiders need to stop being lazy trolls. There is no election fraud here. BW was being lazy and wanted to troll.
Click to expand...
Except that in this case he was correct. There WERE people on the list who shouldn't be there - including a candidate who would have been acclaimed, until they resigned their candidacy to preserve the integrity of the process.

If you can't see the obvious problem with that, you should resign your position with the court. You are charged with protecting the integrity of our legal system, constitution, and bill of rights.

Besides, you are the one doing the name-calling, which comes a lot closer to being a troll than anything I've heard from BW.
 
Dear Govinda
I think there is no ill feeling against you as EC from anyone. Blue Wolf II was asking for official list of eligable candidates since there was objections raised regarding eligibility of some of the people in that list so Blue Wolf II asked you as EC to confirm the list .and regarding early start of election i think you should have followed the timetable set in election law and i appreciate u wanting to move things along faster around here ,but system in TNP is like this and people tend to follow all the rules when it comes to theses matters specially regarding election procedure.
 
There is no election fraud here.
Click to expand...

TNP defines Election Fraud as follows:

Law 22:
Section 4: Election Fraud
A - "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of voters or residents of The North Pacific with regards to the candidates running, the time and venue of the elections, or the requirements and methods by which one may be eligible to vote or run for office.
Click to expand...

You, yourself, have stipulated requirements to be listed on the ballot not found in any governing document (requiring candidates to be seconded) and decided to leave out the 3 day campaigning period required to be held between nominations and voting after you failed to start elections on time.

To a lesser extent Fel could also be charged with fraud as a result of leaving people in the RA when they should have been removed, thereby enabling people to be candidates for office and vote despite the law having required their removal from the RA.
 
If you don't want to give BW2 a reason to point his finger at you, Gov, then don't give him one. You're giving him reasons to by not following protocol and then acting appalled when he calls you out on it. Of course he's going to call you out on it. Follow protocol.
 
He'd rather play the Raider/Defender card than take responsibility for his inaction. Its not really relevant here, but I guess you have to make up something.
 
A mean old man:
If you don't want to give BW2 a reason to point his finger at you, Gov, then don't give him one. You're giving him reasons to by not following protocol and then acting appalled when he calls you out on it. Of course he's going to call you out on it. Follow protocol.
Click to expand...
There is nothing requiring I publish an official list of voters.

Secondly, I asked Felasia for the list, he said it was updated to the best of his knowledge, and I confirmed with Grosse.

The list, as Grosse as far as I could tell, was accurate.

I wasn't willfully trying to deceive voters. I have no reason to. I was trying to do my job as best as I could.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top